RS_Protos
Some very good points, totally agree
Thread
Posts in chronological order
rocknrolllover
[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]rocknrolllover wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]GT wrote:[/b]
If you want clarification, read the sleeve notes on the 2011Deluxe Edition CD of the 'News Of The World' album.[/QUOTE]
If silver salmon from those era why this song wasn't as bonus?
Thank you[/QUOTE]
That's like asking why they don't want to release rarities - it's coz they don't wanna! They want to keep 99.9% of the archives back to use in future label negotiations. It's just used as carrot dangling to get more money out of labels. Given the material (hundreds of hours of unheard studio work - nevermind live - to mine) Universal 100% want to release either massively expanded album re-issues or archive box sets. Universal will not have been happy with the "compromise" of 5 track bonus CDs of largely uninteresting material. Universal wanted to continue the series of concert releases via Eagle Rock, but QPL backed off/pulled the plug. Universal aren't a label who are going to turn unreleased Queen material down - in fact, they were begging for it and coming up against the wall than EMI did. It's their material, but I think it's very sad that they're not willing to delve in and release the great things in the archive. It isn't that they see no worth in it - perversely, it's the very opposite of that and that they use it to extract more money out of labels who bid for the rights to release their material.
[/QUOTE]
The question was not addressed to you, but thank you for the negative response.
Shame on Roger and Brian and I like to think that I can blame them in it
[QUOTE] [b]rocknrolllover wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]GT wrote:[/b]
If you want clarification, read the sleeve notes on the 2011Deluxe Edition CD of the 'News Of The World' album.[/QUOTE]
If silver salmon from those era why this song wasn't as bonus?
Thank you[/QUOTE]
That's like asking why they don't want to release rarities - it's coz they don't wanna! They want to keep 99.9% of the archives back to use in future label negotiations. It's just used as carrot dangling to get more money out of labels. Given the material (hundreds of hours of unheard studio work - nevermind live - to mine) Universal 100% want to release either massively expanded album re-issues or archive box sets. Universal will not have been happy with the "compromise" of 5 track bonus CDs of largely uninteresting material. Universal wanted to continue the series of concert releases via Eagle Rock, but QPL backed off/pulled the plug. Universal aren't a label who are going to turn unreleased Queen material down - in fact, they were begging for it and coming up against the wall than EMI did. It's their material, but I think it's very sad that they're not willing to delve in and release the great things in the archive. It isn't that they see no worth in it - perversely, it's the very opposite of that and that they use it to extract more money out of labels who bid for the rights to release their material.
[/QUOTE]
The question was not addressed to you, but thank you for the negative response.
Shame on Roger and Brian and I like to think that I can blame them in it
Barry Durex
Not being funny, but relying on Q.P. sleeve notes being accurate is a bit of a gamble.
Sebastian
[QUOTE] [b]Barry Durex wrote:[/b]
Not being funny, but relying on Q.P. sleeve notes being accurate is a bit of a gamble.[/QUOTE]
Exactly!
Not being funny, but relying on Q.P. sleeve notes being accurate is a bit of a gamble.[/QUOTE]
Exactly!
Vocal harmony
[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b
That's like asking why they don't want to release rarities - it's coz they don't wanna! They want to keep 99.9% of the archives back to use in future label negotiations. It's just used as carrot dangling to get more money out of labels. Given the material (hundreds of hours of unheard studio work - nevermind live - to mine) Universal 100% want to release either massively expanded album re-issues or archive box sets. Universal will not have been happy with the "compromise" of 5 track bonus CDs of largely uninteresting material. Universal wanted to continue the series of concert releases via Eagle Rock, but QPL backed off/pulled the plug. Universal aren't a label who are going to turn unreleased Queen material down - in fact, they were begging for it and coming up against the wall than EMI did. It's their material, but I think it's very sad that they're not willing to delve in and release the great things in the archive. It isn't that they see no worth in it - perversely, it's the very opposite of that and that they use it to extract more money out of labels who bid for the rights to release their material.
[/QUOTE]
You seem to know a lot about the workings of both Queen Productions and Universal, including what Universal signed Queen for. I guess a fare question would be which do you work for?
The most complete (as far as I can tell) release of rare material is the current on going Pink Floyd project through EMI. Floyd go further back than Queen as a recording band and it's only last year that they have gone this deep into the archive. Previously releasing double sets of their albums/CD's with rare or live recordings.
With the Floyd project in mind there is still hope that Queen will do something similar.
The idea the Universal signed Queen for their un released archive or that Queen Production are hanging on to it for some huge payout is almost laughable. The cost of such releases is huge if done like Floyd have and will only be of interest it real hardcore fans and then only the ones with deep pockets. The real money for a record company ( quick income if you like) selling a band like Queen is in selling to the masses and that means songs that are already known. Or selling new product to ( if any) to new fans
Yes there is mileage in things like The Rainbow but those sales are no match world wide for a New U2 or Stones album or any number of more cut tent artists.
That's like asking why they don't want to release rarities - it's coz they don't wanna! They want to keep 99.9% of the archives back to use in future label negotiations. It's just used as carrot dangling to get more money out of labels. Given the material (hundreds of hours of unheard studio work - nevermind live - to mine) Universal 100% want to release either massively expanded album re-issues or archive box sets. Universal will not have been happy with the "compromise" of 5 track bonus CDs of largely uninteresting material. Universal wanted to continue the series of concert releases via Eagle Rock, but QPL backed off/pulled the plug. Universal aren't a label who are going to turn unreleased Queen material down - in fact, they were begging for it and coming up against the wall than EMI did. It's their material, but I think it's very sad that they're not willing to delve in and release the great things in the archive. It isn't that they see no worth in it - perversely, it's the very opposite of that and that they use it to extract more money out of labels who bid for the rights to release their material.
[/QUOTE]
You seem to know a lot about the workings of both Queen Productions and Universal, including what Universal signed Queen for. I guess a fare question would be which do you work for?
The most complete (as far as I can tell) release of rare material is the current on going Pink Floyd project through EMI. Floyd go further back than Queen as a recording band and it's only last year that they have gone this deep into the archive. Previously releasing double sets of their albums/CD's with rare or live recordings.
With the Floyd project in mind there is still hope that Queen will do something similar.
The idea the Universal signed Queen for their un released archive or that Queen Production are hanging on to it for some huge payout is almost laughable. The cost of such releases is huge if done like Floyd have and will only be of interest it real hardcore fans and then only the ones with deep pockets. The real money for a record company ( quick income if you like) selling a band like Queen is in selling to the masses and that means songs that are already known. Or selling new product to ( if any) to new fans
Yes there is mileage in things like The Rainbow but those sales are no match world wide for a New U2 or Stones album or any number of more cut tent artists.
dysan
Maybe a good comparison is Abba. Best known for hit singles, the only unreleased studio material they ever released was a butchered 20 minute medley of studio out takes cobbled together for a 4 disc boxset (that included the usual suspects). We should count ourselves lucky that the percentage of 'Hit Singles band' Queen that is considered a rock albums act HAS BEEN treated to archival stuff.
Sebastian
It's a bit ironic, though, that they - Brian in particular - won't stop saying Queen were an albums band rather than a singles one ... yet their output says otherwise.
That means that either the record label has far more of a say than we think, or that they don't buy their own story, or that they simply don't care... or a combination of those.
That means that either the record label has far more of a say than we think, or that they don't buy their own story, or that they simply don't care... or a combination of those.
Dim
Even The Game, Flash Gordon and Hot Space have solid sound and music. Whether it is Rock pop album or Funk.
In my opinion only The Works, AKOM and the Miracle presents a singles band. If the Works had more songs like Love kills, I Go Crazy, TMBMTL and Man on Fire it could have been a classic album from the 80s.
Having successful singles in a album it does not mean that the band is not album artists. The Flow of the music in the album makes this.
In my opinion, the majority of their discography makes the album artists. 12 out of 15 studio albums
In my opinion only The Works, AKOM and the Miracle presents a singles band. If the Works had more songs like Love kills, I Go Crazy, TMBMTL and Man on Fire it could have been a classic album from the 80s.
Having successful singles in a album it does not mean that the band is not album artists. The Flow of the music in the album makes this.
In my opinion, the majority of their discography makes the album artists. 12 out of 15 studio albums
Sebastian
The difference is that Queen's Greatest Hits largely outsells their bona fide albums.
Other artists do not have that problem: Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Michael Jackson, Guns 'n' Roses, etc., have all released 'greatest hits' or 'best of ...' or whatever, but they've all got at least one album which was more commercially successful than any of their compilations. Even The Beatles '1' is, at least at the moment, beaten by 'Sgt Pepper's.'
Queen's best-selling albums were News of the World and The Game (four million copies each in America alone), followed by A Night at the Opera (three million copies in America, half a million in Germany). 'Made in Heaven' (which is partly a compilation) outsold Opera four-to-one in Britain and three-to-one in Germany (their main European targets ... though I'm not sure if the UK counts as Europe :p ).
'Greatest Hits' sold twice as much as 'News' and 'Game' in the States, twenty times as much as 'Opera' in Britain, a bit over three times as much as 'Opera' in Germany. For every person who, somewhere in the world, has bought 'Queen II', there are probably twenty-five to thirty people who have bought 'Greatest Hits.' Compare with Pink Floyd, whose 'Echoes', whilst still a big success, was largely outsold in their main target markets by seven bona fide albums, including the hated 'Division Bell'. In fact, for every copy of 'Echoes' sold in the States, there were roughly two copies of 'Animals', three of 'Wish You Were Here', six of 'The Wall' and seven of 'Dark Side.'
Other artists do not have that problem: Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Michael Jackson, Guns 'n' Roses, etc., have all released 'greatest hits' or 'best of ...' or whatever, but they've all got at least one album which was more commercially successful than any of their compilations. Even The Beatles '1' is, at least at the moment, beaten by 'Sgt Pepper's.'
Queen's best-selling albums were News of the World and The Game (four million copies each in America alone), followed by A Night at the Opera (three million copies in America, half a million in Germany). 'Made in Heaven' (which is partly a compilation) outsold Opera four-to-one in Britain and three-to-one in Germany (their main European targets ... though I'm not sure if the UK counts as Europe :p ).
'Greatest Hits' sold twice as much as 'News' and 'Game' in the States, twenty times as much as 'Opera' in Britain, a bit over three times as much as 'Opera' in Germany. For every person who, somewhere in the world, has bought 'Queen II', there are probably twenty-five to thirty people who have bought 'Greatest Hits.' Compare with Pink Floyd, whose 'Echoes', whilst still a big success, was largely outsold in their main target markets by seven bona fide albums, including the hated 'Division Bell'. In fact, for every copy of 'Echoes' sold in the States, there were roughly two copies of 'Animals', three of 'Wish You Were Here', six of 'The Wall' and seven of 'Dark Side.'
Dim
Queen'Greatest hits is from 1981, while or the othe compilations are from 2000's.
Having mentioned ANATO thanks to digital, re-re-releases, Streaming is Now the best selling album from 1975, with bigger sales than Physical Graphity and Wish you Were here.
Also if you check Queen back catalogue sales, you will see that until GH was releases, all Queen albums were selling great. Sheer Heart Attack turned Platinum award in early 80s. The Works was selling great until 1991.
The same happened for all Queen albums when Hollywood records re-released them, the sales droped when Classic Queen and GH were released.
Also record companies like Emi and now universal virgin emi, did and Still do to promote compilations.
Having mentioned ANATO thanks to digital, re-re-releases, Streaming is Now the best selling album from 1975, with bigger sales than Physical Graphity and Wish you Were here.
Also if you check Queen back catalogue sales, you will see that until GH was releases, all Queen albums were selling great. Sheer Heart Attack turned Platinum award in early 80s. The Works was selling great until 1991.
The same happened for all Queen albums when Hollywood records re-released them, the sales droped when Classic Queen and GH were released.
Also record companies like Emi and now universal virgin emi, did and Still do to promote compilations.
Sebastian
A Collection of Great Dance Songs is from 1981 (same year as Queen's Greatest Hits) and it sold really well, but not by any means nearly as well as Floyd's albums until then (especially The Wall and Dark Side, of course).
The Beatles' Red and Blue compilations are from 1973, and they sold really well, but not as well as 'Sgt Pepper's', 'Abbey Road' and perhaps a few others.
MJ had about eight compilations released in the 80's, 'Thriller' still outsold them all, by far.
The Beatles' Red and Blue compilations are from 1973, and they sold really well, but not as well as 'Sgt Pepper's', 'Abbey Road' and perhaps a few others.
MJ had about eight compilations released in the 80's, 'Thriller' still outsold them all, by far.
Dim
The success of their compilations does not make them singles band. Their studio albums in Europe, Japan and some othe countries like Brazil and Angertina have very impressive results better than Deep purpule, led Zeppelin, the Who and others. While bigger results with compilations. Queen since soundscan era are doing great in US.
Sebastian
From a realistic standpoint, yes, it does make a difference. QPL don't care much about an album going platinum in Argentina (that equals sixty thousand shipments), gold in Austria (25 thousand) or double platinum in Poland (forty thousand), they focus instead on trying to make it platinum in America (a million shipments). Mathematically speaking, being certified gold in America earns them more money than being eight times platinum in Argentina, or twenty-five times platinum in Poland.
In fact, the best selling anglophone record ever in Argentina, 'Use Your Illusion II', barely made it to the million mark - whereas plenty of albums by plenty of artists have sold more than that in the States alone.
The average Pink Floyd cares as much about 'Great Gig in the Sky' as 'Another Brick in the Wall' or 'Have a Cigar.' In fact, a Dark Side boxset will be far more effective than a compilation of singles.
For Queen it's not like that: those who care about 'Prophet's Song' or 'March of the Black Queen' are far, far, far outnumbered by those who only know 'Ga Ga', 'Magic' and the like.
In fact, the best selling anglophone record ever in Argentina, 'Use Your Illusion II', barely made it to the million mark - whereas plenty of albums by plenty of artists have sold more than that in the States alone.
The average Pink Floyd cares as much about 'Great Gig in the Sky' as 'Another Brick in the Wall' or 'Have a Cigar.' In fact, a Dark Side boxset will be far more effective than a compilation of singles.
For Queen it's not like that: those who care about 'Prophet's Song' or 'March of the Black Queen' are far, far, far outnumbered by those who only know 'Ga Ga', 'Magic' and the like.
MackMantilla
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
From a realistic standpoint, yes, it does make a difference. QPL don't care much about an album going platinum in Argentina (that equals sixty thousand shipments), gold in than being eight times platinum in Argentina, or twenty-five times platinum in Poland.
In fact, the best selling anglophone record ever in Argentina, 'Use Your Illusion II', barely made it to the Austria (25 thousand) or double platinum in Poland (forty thousand), they focus instead on trying to make it platinum in America (a million shipments). Mathematically speaking, being certified gold in America earns them more money million mark - whereas plenty of albums by plenty of artists have sold more than that in the States alone.
The average Pink Floyd cares as much about 'Great Gig in the Sky' as 'Another Brick in the Wall' or 'Have a Cigar.' In fact, a Dark Side boxset will be far more effective than a compilation of singles.
For Queen it's not like that: those who care about 'Prophet's Song' or 'March of the Black Queen' are far, far, far outnumbered by those who only know 'Ga Ga', 'Magic' and the like.[/QUOTE]
That's right
From a realistic standpoint, yes, it does make a difference. QPL don't care much about an album going platinum in Argentina (that equals sixty thousand shipments), gold in than being eight times platinum in Argentina, or twenty-five times platinum in Poland.
In fact, the best selling anglophone record ever in Argentina, 'Use Your Illusion II', barely made it to the Austria (25 thousand) or double platinum in Poland (forty thousand), they focus instead on trying to make it platinum in America (a million shipments). Mathematically speaking, being certified gold in America earns them more money million mark - whereas plenty of albums by plenty of artists have sold more than that in the States alone.
The average Pink Floyd cares as much about 'Great Gig in the Sky' as 'Another Brick in the Wall' or 'Have a Cigar.' In fact, a Dark Side boxset will be far more effective than a compilation of singles.
For Queen it's not like that: those who care about 'Prophet's Song' or 'March of the Black Queen' are far, far, far outnumbered by those who only know 'Ga Ga', 'Magic' and the like.[/QUOTE]
That's right
Dim
The number of their sales in Europe is about 100 milion sales.
Not counting dvd, video and singles. While Usa sales are about 45milions albums.
The same number of sales is for Led Zeppelin in Usa Maybe bigger and 30milions in Europe.
Don't underestimate different Markets, and see Europe sales as big as usa in overall. See them as union than idividual countries.
Check their World wide success in many countries than USA. That means alot about how great and OpenOffice is Queen music, it reaches many different cultures
Not counting dvd, video and singles. While Usa sales are about 45milions albums.
The same number of sales is for Led Zeppelin in Usa Maybe bigger and 30milions in Europe.
Don't underestimate different Markets, and see Europe sales as big as usa in overall. See them as union than idividual countries.
Check their World wide success in many countries than USA. That means alot about how great and OpenOffice is Queen music, it reaches many different cultures